Create Tenant

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the basic safety profile is known. However, the description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of required permissions, what happens when a tenant with the same name already exists, whether creation is idempotent (annotations say it is not), or what the response returns.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two words carry no waste but also no information; this is under-specification rather than conciseness. Nothing is front-loaded because there is nothing to front-load.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A mutation tool with two required body parameters, no parameter descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations explaining side effects. An agent cannot tell from the definition what a tenant is, what valid input looks like, or what a successful call produces — far short of complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% — neither 'name' nor 'description' has any description in the schema — and the tool description provides zero compensating information. The constraints (3-50 chars, 10-200 chars, allowed character pattern) exist in the schema but the semantics of what a 'tenant name' means or how 'description' is used are completely undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to create a tenant versus listing or getting one, no prerequisites (e.g., whether a provider must exist first, given tenants_providers_create exists), and no mention of name-uniqueness or failure conditions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.